Revision as of 22:49, 6 August 2020

Lock

The main rules page has been locked. As they impact every contributor, rules are not something that should be changed regularly, regardless of how small the changes may be. Changes to the rules will only be made after extensive discussion. Feel free to discuss the rules on this talk page, all members are welcome to voice their opinions on either the existing rules, or propose alternative rules. Sylvanelite 13:15, April 9, 2011 (UTC)

Archive and summary

Zoids Wiki talk:Rules/Archive 1

The above link contains discussion prior to the time of this post. Some noteworthy points are:

Reiteration that:
- The naming rule only applies to the title of a page, not the content, and only when conflicts arise;
- The naming rule applies to ALL pages, not just models alone, characters alone, Zoids alone, etc;
- Popularity is to be cited by evidence of consumption (for instance, sales figures, number of re-runs, etc), and should not be biased to any particular media (specifically, internet forums are a very poor gauge of popularity); and,
- All specific examples should be brought up on their talk page, not here.
Clarification that:
- Gauges of "amount of information" or "relevance" are usually very hard to quantify and are hence subjective;
- Many pages have not been kept up-to-date. This is not because of exemptions in the rules, but rather simple lack of manpower;
- The rules may be vague at times. This is intentional, to allow flexibility;
- The wikia is an English wikia. It should be inherently targeted toward English audiences, even when the original content is targeted at Japanese audiences; and
- The ONLY purpose of the rules is to provide a way to resolve arguments. All alternative proposals MUST accomplish this.

Zoids Wiki talk:Rules/Archive 2

The above link contains some discussion about naming conventions and the like. No clear consensus was reached, as such the rules were not amended.

New Rules: Categories

Recently, there's been a lot of edits over categories. We do not have explicit rules for categories, so I'd through I'd lay down the history and see if people think rules need to be updated:

Fan terms are allowed in categories - this is the only place in the wiki where fan terms are not just allowed, but encouraged. The community has a lot of fan terms, and it's not the wiki's place to scrub them out. However, the wiki doesn't have a way of validating fan terms. As such, it was decided many years ago, to allow categorisation of Zoids by fan terms, and to use those category pages to explain the terms. The most notable examples are the terms "NJR", "NAR", "OJR", etc. These lines aren't well-defined, but are commonly used so are useful for categorisation. Another common use case for this kind of categorisation, is to group Zoids into roles as would be seen in RPGs.

For official categories, an authoritative list should be maintained elsewhere in a "List Of" page.

False information should not be in categories. Even with the above comments, objectively false information should be kept out of categories.

There is no upper bound on the number of categories a page should be in.

Categories should focus on completeness. There is no point making a "Liger" category and applying it to only one of the Ligers.

The current status quo is to allow fan terms into categories. The question is: does this need to change? Sylvanelite (talk) 00:08, February 27, 2019 (UTC)

My comments: we need to allow fan terms into categories. This is based on the overhaul done a few years ago. There is more gained by retaining fan terms, than gained by forcing their removal. It obviously has led to a situation were some users may think a category is useful, while others do not. My personal opinion is to allow these, provided they are limited to categories only (and not to main articles). The overhaul threads, although dated, go into more detail on the need for this. (so I'm saying stay with the status quo) But I'm willing to see if people have a different view on rules around categories. Sylvanelite (talk) 00:08, February 27, 2019 (UTC)

So saying that Zoids use Karate is still a no go and calling Zoids Mammals, Saurischians, sorting them into Tribes that one user seemingly made up, labeling them invertebrates, carnivores, herbivores and generally using Earth's taxonomic system is still not okay? I ask because it's not accurate; Zoids are mecha on the other side of the galaxy in-universe. I also feel that redundant categorization is to be avoided, otherwise users can badge edit with impunity and keep cluttering the wiki.

I'd also like to add this page to the Policy category linked in the header/navigation. It would improve the rules visibility and remove any possible ignorance of them by making them easier to find. Only six pages link to the rules as of now. Zane T 69 (talk) 01:28, February 28, 2019 (UTC)

I also would like to avoid redundant categorization. It also might be better if we move this page either in the project or the forum namespace, as pages about rules rather don't belong in the mainspace. Moviejunkie2009 (talk) 01:37, February 28, 2019 (UTC)

I would support a move to the project namespace, but what are your opinions/ideas on improving the pages visibility. Would adding the rules page to the Policy category still be valid then? I don't personally see a reason not too. The simplified rule set is already in the project namespace. Zane T 69 (talk) 01:52, February 28, 2019 (UTC)

For categorisation, we need a clear criteria. In other words, we need to post the exact text of a proposed change, and try to break it here. For example, the current naming convention is black-and-white, there's no discretion involved aside from common sense, since names can be cited and there's a clear order of priority. There are issues with the naming rule but these are well documented (Zoids Legacy).

There's no such case with categories. To say no "made up" categories is fine, but that applies to nearly all the current categories. Here are some easy iiues that any proposed rule would need to solve:

NJR, NAR, OER, etc - these are all "made up" and have no official citations. But they are widely used by the community - how would these be affected by a new rule?
Karate - This is the cause of the current proposed change, it's obviously too specific for a category, but it's not far off a valid one. You could easily make a "melee" category and provide it with citations to that effect. Would new rules accept or reject this category?
Video Games - Currently we have Anime categories for Zoid appearances, but not games, would new rules consider this over-categorisation or not?
In a similar vein to above, "Aquatic" is another case. It might sound made-up, but there are official categories for it. In fact, this applies not only to things like "Wolf" but also "Insect", "Small", "Reptile", "Flying", "Swimming", etc. The list is not based on earth-like classification, but are official categories.
"Lions and Tigers and Bears, Oh My" - This is another hairy situation, there are many categories that are counterintuitive, and seemingly officially wrong (so the made-up terms are allowed because that's what people know) The most prominent example is the Liger category. Most liger Zoids are not actually Liger-type, they are Lion-type. They are merely called Ligers in their name. Which raises an issue on how to categorise: based on the name of the Zoid, or the type of the Zoid. Or to be even weirder, you can even boot up Zoids Legacy, and see that the Saberlion is officially categorised as a Liger-type in the game's DB, but is neither called liger, nor liger type.

There has never been a sound resolution to these issues, which is why the categories do not currently have a "no fan-terms" rule. It's too hard to actually use this as a rule. Some things which seem like a fan is adding at random, might actually be an official category, and something that looks official, might actually be a fan-term.

The only proposed change I can think of that would resolve the issue, is to set up a master-list of categories, and tell users that they can't add new categories beyond what's on the list. If someone has a new category to add, they would need to propose a change to the master list, and we would judge it on a case-by-case basis. It's cumbersome, but would work. Sylvanelite (talk) 01:39, March 16, 2019 (UTC)

I think a master-list of categories is the best, albeit cumbersome, solution. We need policy to prevent edit-gaming via categorization and over-categorization. Categorizing Zoids for game appearances is reasonable. Widely used fan categories are understandable; it's just how they're known. Most Zoids can be used in melee combat and we don't categorize Zoids for Charged Particle Gun, Laser Blades, and such so I wouldn't support such. Zane T 69 (talk) 03:10, March 16, 2019 (UTC)

Moving This Page

See above comments. To avoid interleaving it with categories, I have created a new heading to discuss it here.

For moving this page, I would like to see the new features completed before messing with old pages. Sylvanelite (talk) 01:39, March 16, 2019 (UTC)

Editing General

As briefly mentioned in the forum: https://zoids.fandom.com/wiki/Forum:Projects The current (2019) wiki changes breach the wiki rules. Particularly, the last 2 dot points of "General Editing". Some of the current breaches are: including affiliate links outside the main page section. Including pages that relate to fans of the franchise, rather than the franchise itself. The easiest fix would be to propose (specific) changes to the rules. Sylvanelite (talk) 02:23, March 16, 2019 (UTC)

I must have tried to write this paragraph many times over. I want to provide a quick overview of the reasoning behind the rules, but eventually I decided that I can't reduce a summary beyond the points already on the rules page. Needless to say, those few dot points were based on many thousand-word debates in the past. They might sound like platitudes, but are actually quite strict. Sylvanelite (talk) 02:46, March 16, 2019 (UTC)

I'd support a specific rule change to include affiliates in navigation, but not solely because it's the easiest solution. It makes the affiliates more visible and increases cross wiki traffic and may gain us new or former fans and editors. Zane T 69 (talk) 03:10, March 16, 2019 (UTC)

I'd also like to support a change of the rules. Keep in mind that the main page is only one page on the wiki, while the navigation can be accessed from everywhere, except the chat. With that we create a stronger connection between similar-themed wikis and increase the traffic. I'll go ahead and also link to this wiki on Transformers, Beast Saga, Kamiwaza Wanda, Tomica and Shinkalion Wiki. Moviejunkie2009 (talk) 20:29, March 18, 2019 (UTC)

We all seem to be in agreement, so I've made an update: https://zoids.fandom.com/index.php?title=Zoids_Wiki%3ARules&diff=60242&oldid=60150 let me know if there's an issue with the wording changes. Sylvanelite (talk) 10:51, March 20, 2019 (UTC)

Anon lock

Due to a spate of inane edits from anon users, the ability to edit the wiki has been restricted to only registered accounts. This isn't a rule change per-se, just an announcement that the lock has been put in place. Sylvanelite (talk) 22:49, August 6, 2020 (UTC)

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+=Lock=
-Rationale:
+The main rules page has been locked. As they impact every contributor, rules are not something that should be changed regularly, regardless of how small the changes may be. Changes to the rules will only be made after extensive discussion. Feel free to discuss the rules on this talk page, all members are welcome to voice their opinions on either the existing rules, or propose alternative rules. [[User:Sylvanelite|Sylvanelite]] 13:15, April 9, 2011 (UTC)
-*1-Naming: Romanisations do not take into account spelling or grammar, or other such context that makes the name correct to an English-speaker. They are simply Japanese words written with English letters, and as such, are unreliable. Unofficial translations are subjective and often contradict one another, and therefore cannot be reliably cited.
-:This Wiki revolves around the use of many different contributors and users. This is the reason why popularity is a useful and reliable criteria for picking the naming convention.
-*2-Notability: If something is difficult to navigate it becomes difficult to edit and information becomes unreliable (for instance, if an article is unnecessarily long, a new page splitting up the content makes it much easier to check the correctness of). If a new page only contains repeated information, then to edit one page requires a user to edit two pages, obviously reducing the integrity of the wiki. If a new page does not contain information, then if, in future, someone wants to make the same page, they first have to find the old page and bring it to conform with their future page, making edits more difficult, and thus should be avoided (as well as making problems with navigation).
-*3-Speculation cannot be cited, by definition, and therefore cannot be taken as fact. Furthermore, official material is not made to be robust to inferences made by its fans (it is made to be entertaining), and therefore, no matter how common-sense the speculation is, it is unreliable, and should not be used.
-*4-There is no universal fan group for Zoids, so information about fans cannot be cited and is therefore not wiki-worthy (Note that this is distinct from, say, information about the popularity of the franchise, as this can be cited, for instance, by sales data).
+==Archive and summary==
-:''Please note that these rules may be subject to change. For the relevant discussion on them, please see [http://zoids.wikia.com/index.php?title=Forum:Rules This] forum topic.''
+[[Zoids Wiki talk:Rules/Archive 1]]
+The above link contains discussion prior to the time of this post. Some noteworthy points are:
-A quick question. What do we do if somthing is implied or hinted, and how would we write that down?
+*Reiteration that:
-([[User:Zoids Fanatic|Zoids Fanatic]] 23:55, June 29, 2010 (UTC))
+**The naming rule only applies to the ''title'' of a page, not the content, and only when conflicts arise;
+**The naming rule applies to ALL pages, not just models alone, characters alone, Zoids alone, etc;
+**Popularity is to be cited by evidence of consumption (for instance, sales figures, number of re-runs, etc), and should not be biased to any particular media (specifically, internet forums are a very poor gauge of popularity); and,
+**All specific examples should be brought up on their talk page, not here.
+*Clarification that:
+**Gauges of "amount of information" or "relevance" are usually very hard to quantify and are hence subjective;
+**Many pages have not been kept up-to-date. This is not because of exemptions in the rules, but rather simple lack of manpower;
+**The rules may be vague at times. This is intentional, to allow flexibility;
+**The wikia is an English wikia. It should be inherently targeted toward English audiences, even when the original content is targeted at Japanese audiences; and
+**The '''ONLY''' purpose of the rules is to provide a way to resolve arguments. All alternative proposals ''MUST'' accomplish this.
+[[Zoids Wiki talk:Rules/Archive 2]]
-I kinda want to use the forum to discuss this, and leave this page with naught but the rationale, but until an admin come along and sorts it out, there's no harm done. Anyway, it depends on exactly what it is you're talking about, I can't say without context, because if it is implied but the viewer must make the jump, then don't mention it, but if it is implied outright in-context, then just say that "X was implied by Y". [[User:Slax01|Slax01]] 01:06, June 30, 2010 (UTC)
+The above link contains some discussion about naming conventions and the like. No clear consensus was reached, as such the rules were not amended.
-Well, let's hope the relationship sections are fine then.
-([[User:Zoids Fanatic|Zoids Fanatic]] 01:13, June 30, 2010 (UTC))
+==New Rules: Categories==
-What if the only "official" translation is clearly wrong? For example, the box of Elephantus calls it "Elepantus", the Sauro Knights box calls it "Ssauro Knights" and the manual of Airsplitter calls it "Air Spliter". Also, I haven't seen any official translation of Will's name (the hero of Saga Fuzors) - does that mean we should romanize it and call him "Wiru"? In cases like that, I suggest the "unofficial" translation takes priority over the romanization if there is no conflict (i.e. only one "unofficial" translation). [[User:Cheironyx|Cheironyx]] 10:00, March 1, 2011 (UTC)
+Recently, there's been a lot of edits over categories. We do not have explicit rules for categories, so I'd through I'd lay down the history and see if people think rules need to be updated:
+* Fan terms are allowed in categories - this is the only place in the wiki where fan terms are not just allowed, but encouraged. The community has a lot of fan terms, and it's not the wiki's place to scrub them out. However, the wiki doesn't have a way of validating fan terms. As such, it was decided many years ago, to allow categorisation of Zoids by fan terms, and to use those category pages to explain the terms. The most notable examples are the terms "NJR", "NAR", "OJR", etc. These lines aren't well-defined, but are commonly used so are useful for categorisation. Another common use case for this kind of categorisation, is to group Zoids into roles as would be seen in RPGs.
-"In the event of two official translations existing, if '''common sense''' does not resolve the conflict" I'm pretty sure common sense can be employed here. Besides, most of those that you have listed don't have only one official translation (notwithstanding the fact that most of what you've listed are romanisations and not translations (according to wiki definitions) anyway). Elephantus needs to be checked out (I could only find the one box, according to the wiki it was re-released with a different box, and the one manual I found was too low resolution to read), Sauro knights is spelt that way on the back of the box, Airsplitter (I don't know what this is, but either way) you have implied that the box contradicts the manual- if so, then there isn't only one translation and finally, with "Will" if there's no official romanisation or translation, we are free to use anything we wish. If the official (ie: published) romanisation is "wiru" then yes, we do use that, but I'd want to see the source first. [[User:Slax01|Slax01]] 11:02, March 1, 2011 (UTC)
+* For official categories, an authoritative list should be maintained elsewhere in a "List Of" page.
-Elephantus is consistently spelled without an "h" on the original and Memorial Box versions - in fact, every Japanese site calls it "Elepantus" as well. The box of Airsplitter (a limited edition Custom Blox) doesn't have the name in English anywhere, and again, all the Japanese sites call it "Air Spliter". I hadn't looked at the back of the Sauro Knights box, sorry about that. Finally, you might want to change the page to ''official'' romanisation > unofficial translation. Even so, there are characters like Störmer and Shuu who do have one official romanisation - "Sheterma" and "Syuw". I really wouldn't want to use those XP
+* False information should not be in categories. Even with the above comments, objectively false information should be kept out of categories.
-P.S. "Information about fans" may be unreliable, but information about any particular fan or any fan-made game/custom/art can be cited just fine. The fan-made materials might be worth mentioning just to show people that they aren't official (e.g. mention Shield Liger Assault at the bottom of the List of Games page so people won't mistake it for an official game). [[User:Cheironyx|Cheironyx]] 01:48, March 2, 2011 (UTC)
+* There is no upper bound on the number of categories a page should be in.
-@elephantus: I only wonder what the OAR name was (as the article states it was repackaged) but otherwise, if consistent, then the page, indeed, should be changed to "Elepantus". Either way, the name Elepantus should be mentioned in the article.<br />
-@Airsplitter, again, if consistent, we use what the official media use.<br />
-@Romanisations, I thought I had put in a definition, but I guess they didn't make it off the draft page, so I've updated it accordingly, thanks for pointing that out.<br />
-@fan-made, if fan sections are to be made I suggest some things:<br />
-- keep it to a single page, perhaps multiple pages, such as one for websites, one for custom models, etc, but VERY strictly enforce the content being kept on these pages ONLY, so that we don't get a repeat of people inserting nonsense into articles as has happened many times in the past. (and good lord it took alot of work to get rid of). The purpose of these pages would have to be very clear.<br />
-- I am VERY adverse to putting any kind of fan material into existing pages, even with strict rules and sections, for many reasons, not least of which is past experience.<br />
-- I am adverse to putting info about specific people up, as this can invade privacy and/or lead to ego trips/flame wars when people don't get the recognition they deserve, or someone else gets more than themselves. Even statements as simple as "this was done by X" can cause hell to break loose.<br />
-- We can't be sure of who's posting what, so if we post a creation without the right to, many (significant) problems can be created, especially with the possibility of imposters. I'd want disclaimers and stuff, because experience has told me that the Zoids community in particular is quite strict when it comes to these kinds of things.
+* Categories should focus on completeness. There is no point making a "Liger" category and applying it to only one of the Ligers.
-These are just some of the issues with fanpages. I must note that there are certainly advantages to having them, but I'd just be careful about them that's all. The existing rule was made because we had HUGE amounts of false info in the wiki, but as most of it has been removed, I'm not too opposed to relaxing the rule, provided we take due care with where we tread. [[User:Slax01|Slax01]] 08:26, March 2, 2011 (UTC)
+The current status quo is to allow fan terms into categories. The question is: does this need to change? [[User:Sylvanelite|Sylvanelite]] ([[User talk:Sylvanelite|talk]]) 00:08, February 27, 2019 (UTC)
-Yeah, when I said "information about any particular fan" I was just trying to make a point - I don't see much reason to actually add that kind of thing to the wiki. For the fan-made stuff, I was thinking of just adding notes about "this is NOT official, so don't add pages about it or ask why it's not on the wiki". Anyway, my main point is that "official" spellings can still be plain wrong - just look at the official [http://www.zoids-inf.net/explus/chara3.html Zoids Infinity EX+ site] - and there should be some better way of deciding what to use. Sorry about arguing so much ;) [[User:Cheironyx|Cheironyx]] 10:04, March 2, 2011 (UTC)
+:My comments: we need to allow fan terms into categories. This is based on the overhaul done a few years ago. There is more gained by retaining fan terms, than gained by forcing their removal. It obviously has led to a situation were some users may think a category is useful, while others do not. My personal opinion is to allow these, provided they are limited to categories only (and not to main articles). The overhaul threads, although dated, go into more detail on the need for this. (so I'm saying stay with the status quo) But I'm willing to see if people have a different view on rules around categories. [[User:Sylvanelite|Sylvanelite]] ([[User talk:Sylvanelite|talk]]) 00:08, February 27, 2019 (UTC)
-:Fan stuff in general lacks notability. For example, if I make a custom Zoid, who's to say it's more or less notable than another fan-made Zoid? There are potentially infinite things we would have to add to the wiki, and every one would need the "this is not official" disclaimer. It would be trivial to drum up more fan-made pages than official ones. In particular, this is a problem with internet forums. While some forums are indeed big, they are certainly not ubiquitous. Right now, this wiki isn't intended to supersede internet forums. The fan-made things can be kept to the fourms. We could add something like that in the future, but I'd suggest talking about that on the [[Forum:Help_desk| help desk]]. As it stands, the rule it just there to prevent people from claiming notability over other people, which can cause flames.
+So saying that Zoids use Karate is still a no go and calling Zoids Mammals, Saurischians, sorting them into Tribes that one user seemingly made up, labeling them invertebrates, carnivores, herbivores and generally using Earth's taxonomic system is still not okay? I ask because it's not accurate; Zoids are mecha on the other side of the galaxy in-universe. I also feel that redundant categorization is to be avoided, otherwise users can badge edit with impunity and keep cluttering the wiki.
-:As for your second point, about the official spellings being wrong. The rules are primarily there disambiguate between various official spellings. That site falls under rule 2 "''published Japanese media which uses English letters''". Whereas rule number 1 states "''published English media''". So the site you've listed wouldn't be used unless there was no English version of that character's name.
+I'd also like to add this page to the Policy category linked in the header/navigation. It would improve the rules visibility and remove any possible ignorance of them by making them easier to find. Only six pages link to the rules as of now. [[User:Zane T 69|Zane T 69]] ([[User talk:Zane T 69|talk]]) 01:28, February 28, 2019 (UTC)
-:To try and give an example of the rules in action I'll take some names. The site you've provided states "'''Brat Hunter'''". The English release of Zoids Legacy states "'''Ballad H.'''", the New Century DVD special features states "'''Brad Hunter (Ballad Hunter)'''" and finally, the anime calls him "'''Brad'''" (but don't state a surname).
+I also would like to avoid redundant categorization. It also might be better if we move this page either in the project or the forum namespace, as pages about rules rather don't belong in the mainspace. [[User:Moviejunkie2009|Moviejunkie2009]] ([[User talk:Moviejunkie2009|talk]]) 01:37, February 28, 2019 (UTC)
-:So rule number 1 kicks in "'''published English media'''" over "'''published Japanese media which uses English letters'''". That leaves "'''Brad'''", "'''Brad Hunter (Ballad Hunter)'''", "'''Ballad H.'''" all preferred over "'''Brat Hunter'''". But now we have to distinguish between the various english versions. The most popular version is by far the anime, which calls him "'''Brad'''", but ommits the surname. So further info is needed, leaving the anime DVD and Zoids Legacy. Now the DVD is less popular than the TV airings of the anime, and Legacy is the only Zoids game to recieve a world-wide release. So popularity can't distinguish between the two. Common sense kicks in, saying Legacy's translation is generally pretty poor, and that the anime DVD is the same as the TV show. This gives us the final name of "'''Brad Hunter'''".
+:I would support a move to the project namespace, but what are your opinions/ideas on improving the pages visibility. Would adding the rules page to the Policy category still be valid then? I don't personally see a reason not too. The simplified rule set is already in the project namespace. [[User:Zane T 69|Zane T 69]] ([[User talk:Zane T 69|talk]]) 01:52, February 28, 2019 (UTC)
-:That's how the rules work, and they work very well. Part of the reason for the rules was to stop the whole fan-made thing above. In some rare cases (e.g. Zoids Genesis) the names of characters have to be taken from fan-translations. But then it causes problems, why is one person's fan-translation better or worse than another person's translation? In particular, when people start doing "corrections" to Japanese names. For example, take a look at [[Palty]]. In the past (before we had these rules) there were two contesting names "Palty" and "Party". One fan thought "Party should be used because that's the correction to the spelling of Palty", another fan thought "Palty should be used because it sounds more foreign, and other anime/games do this (e.g Tales of Symphonia)". Both people here had '''perfectly valid reasons''' for supporting their claims, and as it stood, it was '''impossible''' to say who's translation was right, and who's was wrong. So the only way to resolve this was to make the rules (as they are now) and lay down the law. That's what is meant by: "'''Unofficial translations are subjective and often contradict one another, and therefore cannot be reliably cited.'''". It's only there to stop flame wars.
+For categorisation, we need a clear criteria. In other words, we need to post the exact text of a proposed change, and try to break it here. For example, the current naming convention is black-and-white, there's no discretion involved aside from common sense, since names can be cited and there's a clear order of priority. There are issues with the naming rule but these are well documented (Zoids Legacy).
-:So, I've blabbed on for a while, but hopefully that gives enough reasons as to why the rules are as they are. They might seem like they are choosing a bad or deliberately wrong name, but we do always try and use the most correct official name possible. I am open to changing the rules, but so far the number of problems it's solved has been far greater than the number it's caused. [[User:Sylvanelite|Sylvanelite]] 07:13, March 3, 2011 (UTC)
+There's no such case with categories. To say no "made up" categories is fine, but that applies to nearly all the current categories. Here are some easy iiues that any proposed rule would need to solve:
-Yeah, the rules work fine how they are. I guess the main idea I'm getting at is that we should have another option for when the fan opinion is overwhelmingly ''against'' the official spelling for a justified reason - e.g. Elephantus over Elepantus or Störmer over Sheterma. I'm guessing most fans wouldn't be happy with spelling Raven's name as "Leyvin", even if there was no anime and the Infinity page was all we had. But I don't mind too much if the rules stay as they are. P.S. The OAR Elephantus had no name, unless you want to call it "The Zoid That Has 2 Huge Ears And Is Sturdy And Strong" :P [[User:Cheironyx|Cheironyx]] 07:26, March 4, 2011 (UTC)
+* NJR, NAR, OER, etc - these are all "made up" and have no official citations. But they are widely used by the community - how would these be affected by a new rule?
-I have said this in the past, and my argument hasn't changed. Here's a brief overview of what it was: Firstly is with respect to "most fans". "Most fans" would have no idea what the Elephantus or Stormer are in the first place, as most fans are spawned from the Nc0 or CC/GF animes (or at least, most english fans, who comprise our audience), and are probably not represented on internet forums (especially given the demographic and years zero/CC were released). This, by default, means people using these names can be assumed to be in a ''minority''. Secondly, if we assume that people read this wiki (admittedly, a tall assumption xD), then any information we have on here *becomes* a popular opinion. Thirdly, "justified" is subjective. If you popularise a name, people ''will'' find so-called "justifications" to keep it (examples are plentiful, heck I just did it on the Elephantus talk page). I'm not trying to shoot you down, I appreciate the sentiment, and your point of view makes sense, I'm just playing devil's advocate so that decisions we make here are robust and sound. [[User:Slax01|Slax01]] 08:13, March 4, 2011 (UTC)
+* Karate - This is the cause of the current proposed change, it's obviously too specific for a category, but it's not far off a valid one. You could easily make a "melee" category and provide it with citations to that effect. Would new rules accept or reject this category?
+* Video Games - Currently we have Anime categories for Zoid appearances, but not games, would new rules consider this over-categorisation or not?
+* In a similar vein to above, "Aquatic" is another case. It might sound made-up, but there are official categories for it. In fact, this applies not only to things like "Wolf" but also "Insect", "Small", "Reptile", "Flying", "Swimming", etc. The list is not based on earth-like classification, but are official categories.
+* "Lions and Tigers and Bears, Oh My" - This is another hairy situation, there are many categories that are counterintuitive, and seemingly officially wrong (so the made-up terms are allowed because that's what people know) The most prominent example is the Liger category. Most liger Zoids are not actually Liger-type, they are Lion-type. They are merely called Ligers in their name. Which raises an issue on how to categorise: based on the name of the Zoid, or the type of the Zoid. Or to be even weirder, you can even boot up Zoids Legacy, and see that the Saberlion is officially categorised as a Liger-type in the game's DB, but is neither called liger, nor liger type.
+There has never been a sound resolution to these issues, which is why the categories do not currently have a "no fan-terms" rule. It's too hard to actually use this as a rule. Some things which seem like a fan is adding at random, might actually be an official category, and something that looks official, might actually be a fan-term.
+The only proposed change I can think of that would resolve the issue, is to set up a master-list of categories, and tell users that they can't add new categories beyond what's on the list. If someone has a new category to add, they would need to propose a change to the master list, and we would judge it on a case-by-case basis. It's cumbersome, but would work. [[User:Sylvanelite|Sylvanelite]] ([[User talk:Sylvanelite|talk]]) 01:39, March 16, 2019 (UTC)
-:This was written in reply to Cheironyx's edit, not Slax's. I was writing this while Slax posted, so there was a merge conflict.
+:I think a master-list of categories is the best, albeit cumbersome, solution. We need policy to prevent edit-gaming via categorization and over-categorization. Categorizing Zoids for game appearances is reasonable. Widely used fan categories are understandable; it's just how they're known. Most Zoids can be used in melee combat and we don't categorize Zoids for Charged Particle Gun, Laser Blades, and such so I wouldn't support such. [[User:Zane T 69|Zane T 69]] ([[User talk:Zane T 69|talk]]) 03:10, March 16, 2019 (UTC)
-:There are three problems with that.
+==Moving This Page==
-:1) Who measures "overwhelming"? Can you tell me how many Zoids fans there are in the world, and of those, how many use the name "Elephantus"? The answer is no. What you can do is cite forums, but forums are very good at self-promoting wrong information. For example, fans "overwhelmingly" used the name Berserk Führer, which is one reason why the Fury's page initially lived under Führer. Ultimately though, the people that actually knew the name Führer were a small minority of the people who knew the Zoid (almost an insignificant number compared to the people who know the name Fury). It's impossible to measure "overwhelming", so we don't use that as a factor in decision making.
+See above comments. To avoid interleaving it with categories, I have created a new heading to discuss it here.
+For moving this page, I would like to see the new features completed before messing with old pages. [[User:Sylvanelite|Sylvanelite]] ([[User talk:Sylvanelite|talk]]) 01:39, March 16, 2019 (UTC)
-:2) It doesn't settle arguments. Like the Palty vs Party thing. If someone comes up with a good reason for an alternative name, there is no way of settling the argument. "Better" is subjective. "Official" is not.
+==Editing General==
-:3) "Fan opinion" is self-fulfilling. "Because fans call it Elephantus, it should be Elephantus on the wiki", which in turn means any fans reading the wiki now call it Elephantus, which increases the number of fans calling it "Elephantus". That's circular reasoning, and could be applied to anything.
+As briefly mentioned in the forum: [//zoids.fandom.com/wiki/Forum:Projects https://zoids.fandom.com/wiki/Forum:Projects] The current (2019) wiki changes breach the wiki rules. Particularly, the last 2 dot points of "General Editing". Some of the current breaches are: including affiliate links outside the main page section. Including pages that relate to fans of the franchise, rather than the franchise itself. The easiest fix would be to propose (specific) changes to the rules. [[User:Sylvanelite|Sylvanelite]] ([[User talk:Sylvanelite|talk]]) 02:23, March 16, 2019 (UTC)
-:Making exceptions would defeat the point of having the rules, because the rules are ultimately only there to settle arguments when they arises. We would (actually we do) get thing like "but you made an exception for page XYZ why not ABC as well"? I am open to suggestions, but any changes to the rules have to be able to stop arguments without ambiguity, that's the only real strength to the current rules. [[User:Sylvanelite|Sylvanelite]] 08:19, March 4, 2011 (UTC)
+I must have tried to write this paragraph many times over. I want to provide a quick overview of the reasoning behind the rules, but eventually I decided that I can't reduce a summary beyond the points already on the rules page. Needless to say, those few dot points were based on many thousand-word debates in the past. They might sound like platitudes, but are actually quite strict. [[User:Sylvanelite|Sylvanelite]] ([[User talk:Sylvanelite|talk]]) 02:46, March 16, 2019 (UTC)
-I guess I can't argue with that. I really don't want Störmer and Shuu changed, but all I can say in their defence is that I've seen maybe two people spell their names that way and zero people (but one pamphlet) spell them another way :P [[User:Cheironyx|Cheironyx]] 12:10, March 4, 2011 (UTC)
+:I'd support a specific rule change to include affiliates in navigation, but not solely because it's the easiest solution. It makes the affiliates more visible and increases cross wiki traffic and may gain us new or former fans and editors. [[User:Zane T 69|Zane T 69]] ([[User talk:Zane T 69|talk]]) 03:10, March 16, 2019 (UTC)
+:I'd also like to support a change of the rules. Keep in mind that the main page is only one page on the wiki, while the navigation can be accessed from everywhere, except the chat. With that we create a stronger connection between similar-themed wikis and increase the traffic. I'll go ahead and also link to this wiki on Transformers, Beast Saga, Kamiwaza Wanda, Tomica and Shinkalion Wiki. [[User:Moviejunkie2009|Moviejunkie2009]] ([[User talk:Moviejunkie2009|talk]]) 20:29, March 18, 2019 (UTC)
-== New rule ==
+:We all seem to be in agreement, so I've made an update: https://zoids.fandom.com/index.php?title=Zoids_Wiki%3ARules&diff=60242&oldid=60150 let me know if there's an issue with the wording changes. [[User:Sylvanelite|Sylvanelite]] ([[User talk:Sylvanelite|talk]]) 10:51, March 20, 2019 (UTC)
-Can I propose a new rule/guideline or two? Firstly, most English-language Zoids material uses American spellings (e.g. Styluarmor over Styluarmour, Customize Parts over Customise Parts), so all Zoids terms (if not entire pages) should use American spelling, with exceptions for OER/Zoids2/NER stuff (since they were mainly in the UK and therefore use British spellings) or if there is solid evidence for the British spelling (e.g. サーベル sabre and セイバー saber are spelled differently in English ''and'' in katakana - sabre is used for the OJR Sabretiger and in weapon names from most releases, by the way). Secondly, evidence from memory, second-hand info and similar hard-to-verify sources should be strongly discouraged on ''almost'' every page. However, it should be strongly ''encouraged'' for discontinued and hard-to-get-at material such as Online Wars and the Fuzors mobile phone game, since it could be the only possible way to get information about them. [[User:Cheironyx|Cheironyx]] 00:44, March 27, 2011 (UTC)
+==Anon lock==
-:"all Zoids terms should use American spelling"
+Due to a spate of inane edits from anon users, the ability to edit the wiki has been restricted to only registered accounts. This isn't a rule change per-se, just an announcement that the lock has been put in place. [[User:Sylvanelite|Sylvanelite]] ([[User talk:Sylvanelite|talk]]) 22:49, August 6, 2020 (UTC)
-::"In the event of two official translations existing, if common sense does not resolve the conflict, use the ''most popular'' version." -I believe this sentence adequately resolves the issue, especially considering that your rationale for using American is that it is the most popular (how widespread a term is in official media is a good proxy for popularity).
-::as for general spelling, american english should be used by default, for consistency. Writing in non-american english is not against the rules though, for the same reason "making typos" is not against the rules.
-:"... However, it should be strongly ''encouraged'' for discontinued and hard-to-get-at material such as Online Wars and the Fuzors mobile phone game, since it could be the only possible way to get information about them."
-::I disagree with this. If you look at the edit history of many of the video games' character pages, you'll notice that many had a great deal of completely false information inserted ([http://zoids.wikia.com/index.php?title=Max_Rubin&action=historysubmit&diff=36111&oldid=35709 example here]). As such, I am against ''encouraging'' using hard-to-verify sources- it can easily lead to justified vandalism. I'd rather have no info than incorrect info. That said, the opposite is true, if you object with an article and want it deleted, you need to say why, and in saying why, you need citations, so if someone makes a page without citation, then it can't be removed without citation, so if the page is on an obscure object, which has no citations either way, then that means the page can't be removed at all. Of course, common sense hold here, so this is by no means a blank cheque to make pages. [[User:Slax01|Slax01]] 05:43, March 27, 2011 (UTC)
-Changed "most popular" to "most information" as popular can easily change due to fans of the franchise. "Most information" an example would be Bigasauru vs. Giant ZRK, Giant ZRK is more popular because it's the name used in the US and Europe but Bigasauru, while less popular and a #2 catagory name, has way more pertanant information to benefit the article.
-:I can see why you'd say this but I had thought about it when I wrote these and my reason for using popular is listed at the top of the page: ''"This Wiki revolves around the use of many different contributors and users. This is the reason why popularity is a useful and reliable criteria for picking the naming convention. "''
-:Information, on the other hand, while it seems like a reliable objective measure, is actually much more subjective than it looks. Popularity can be got from measures like sales, viewership, or proxies thereof. But how do we measure information? Number of pages? Episodes? re-releases? do we take quality of information or just look at quantity? If we do look at quality, how do we define quality? Thus, I went with popularity. I know above I said not to add info about fans of the series, but its not really a contradiction, I could elaborate, but to save creating a wall of text, I won't unless asked.
-:On the Giant ZRK comment, I do want to change the page to Giant ZRK, in lieu of a citation for an english release under the name "Bigasauru". [[User:Slax01|Slax01]] 08:24, April 6, 2011 (UTC)
-:Leon what's your problem dude? Undoing my edits and saying "why would you delete it with no explination?". HELLO: I GAVE my explanations already. I can't help it if you are illiterate! I am undoing your (horrible and messy) edits, if you have any sensible comments feel free to post them, but for god's sake stop undoing my edits for no reason!! [[User:Slax01|Slax01]] 21:49, April 6, 2011 (UTC)
-That is an exageration. I do not undo all of your edits. If it seems that way, then you have my apologies. Also, I did not see it last time, sorry about that. I will leave it the way it is now.--[[User:Leon35|Leon35]] 00:03, April 7, 2011 (UTC)
-By most information I meant pertaining the Zoid released, not quantity of the info per say but the version of the Zoid varient we ''know ''the most about. This would be the varient with the most pertinant information that visitors/ average fans most easily recognise/be looking for. It would also be the varient/spelling with info that can most easily be cited. Following the trend, in ''most'' cases, this would end up being the more popular varient/spelling anyway. Zaber over Saber, Sheild Liger over Shield Tiger, Bear Fighter over Zear and so on.
-Maybe something to the extent of the "most known and generally used" would be a better way of putting it. Popularity-wise I'm betting Command Wolf AC out ranks the normal one 'cause it was piloted by Brad (same with CW Irvine) and it enjoyed a release here in the U.S., and there were 2 HMM AC's but we use the simpler name Command Wolf because it can direct to the most varients even though white/normal one never made it to the NAR. Plus, the anime character ussually just call it Command Wolf anyway. Spinosnapper (NAR and anime varient) is likely more popular than Spinosapper but -Sapper has better details. Similar cases include Diablotiger over the Battle Legends Diablo Tiger Alpha, Ultrasaurus over the American Ultra Saurus and the big bad NJR Blox names (Dimetroptera) over the cheaper, way-more-common-on-ebay NAR Z-Builder names (Dimetra Ptera).
-I'm actually for keeping Bigasauru believe it or not, only because Bigasauru has stats, Battle Story info, how it fought, what beat it and other nice details. Giant ZRK, well, we know it showed up in the US and Namer named the large powerful machine Giant ZRK in the comics.
-:@Leon, I never said you undid all my edits. I said "stop undoing my edits" because they were my edits, they were undone and I want you to stop it. Next time you falsely accuse me of lying (or "exaggerating"), please read what I have written first, as it is seriously irritating having to repeat myself, considering how many times this has happened now.
-:@anon:I get where you're coming from, but it doesn't really answer my questions, ie:
-''"This would be the varient with the most pertinant information"''
-:But how do we define "most pertinent information"?
-''"that visitors/ average fans most easily recognise/be looking for"''
-:the recognise part is better achieved via popularity than information (its not the number of books written, its who's read them that makes them recognised or sought after).
-''"It would also be the varient/spelling with info that can most easily be cited."''
-:same problem again, "ease of citation" is subjective, which is particularly problematic as the only time we need this rule is when we have two equally valid citations which contradict each other.
-''"Maybe something to the extent of the "most known and generally used" would be a better way of putting it."''
-:Isn't this what popular is?
-''"Spinosnapper (NAR and anime varient) is likely more popular than Spinosapper but -Sapper has better details."''
-:It is pronounced "sapper" in the anime and given the overwhelming (and unquestionable) popularity of the New Century anime, I'd have to disagree with this conclusion. I would do similar for the other instances, but I don't have my sources handy, so I'd be working off memory and I'd likely make a mistake.
-''"I'm actually for keeping Bigasauru believe it or not"''
-:Without a citation, I'm not. Point in case: people love writing Furher rather than Fury and without a clear rule to stop them, will fight tooth and nail to get their version used, no matter how little sense it actually makes. This, and only this, is my reason for the rule, and a refusal to let people go by their preferences. A pity, because I'd love to just let people go with what they want, but this community is just way too unreliable (lol I remember at one point we had two totally different pages: one for Rev Raptor one for Rev Rater- go figure xD). [[User:Slax01|Slax01]] 08:37, April 7, 2011 (UTC)
-@anon1: agree with slax. If there is no citations, why should be keep them? Bigasauru will become a page redirect, but the page itself wll become Bigasaur or Giant Zrk, depending on what the community decides[[User:Leon35|Leon35]] 14:18, April 7, 2011 (UTC)
-== If it's Popular to jump off a cliff... ==
-Did I not clarify that this would usually be the more popular varient anyway?
-Pertinant, relevant info how about you find a good way of measuring it for me. It's one of the criteria on making new pages.
-Yes, "well known/ generally used" can be concieved as very very similar to popular (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/popular) , that's why I suggested ''to the extent of.'' My intentions were for a slightly more rigid justification than the plain more "popular" bit in cases of two or more valid names.
-Popularity has a nasty habit of changing as do fan-bases, toy company priorities and the favors of television broadcasters. And saying something "is more popular" can hardly be considered a strong source/citation.
-A criteria for finding more rigid justification than "popular" or "common sense" may be found through factoring in which Zoid/varient/name has enjoyed the longer release, includes stats (model's box first, then DVD, then games and cards) that are easy to include under the photo, which was more available to buy, which model came first and which name is simplest to direct to multiple versions of a single Zoid.
-Now, most of those are model favorable factors. After considering the best Model name then Anime, Comics and Game names can be considered. My logic being, Models are the backbone of the Zoids '''franchise.''' Anime is likely the bulk of the Zoids '''fan-base''', yes but not the franchise. Fan-base make the wiki's visitors and contributors, Franchise makes the facts. And, yeah, there can be alot of overlap in there.
-Yes, some of these factors may be considered common sense and may indeed lead to the popular Zoid anyway, but there should be something better than simple popularity when considering a name for an entire page containing lots of releases. In a case of two or more valid''' printed '''names it seems more logical to first use the whatever varient has stats and battle story used for the page, second which ever was released more/longer, third which single name can be more broadly used to define multiple releases and then consider whatever anime/comic/game/fanbased stuff last.
-BTW, -Snapper is what my /Zero pamphlet calls it. I prefer a printed source of U.S. origin over the Canadian translated /Zero anime. Unless you mean the Japanese /Zero. Yes, the anime is very popular. But, how do you source anime info and pronounciation but through what anime fans analyze and perceive as "correct"? As the community (and ultimately the popularity) is "unreliable", there should be some consideration put into finding a more solid source to base the criteria.
-A fan can say "Saix is faster than a Storm Sworder" but the models stats say otherwise. If a wave of Anime Saix fans came in saying the model's stats are wrong and prove Saix is faster because Episode X clearly shows Saix outpacing Strom Sworder at exactly 3 minutes into Episode X and Character A stated Saix can go at the much faster speed of B miles per hour, what then? Should we toss out the printed speed of Saix in favor of the more popular Anime speed? The current speed would probably not be changed even though a faster Saix was popular, valid and cited. Anime (the more popular) Zoid sizes (and other stats), creation date, abilities, factions, combat purpose, original creator and length of service in proper ZAC years are not put as the main/overview facts of the Zoid as a whole. Popularity has not dictated the creation of pages either. Why should naming be popularity-based? Especially whan there's better criteria out there.
-Long post is long, especially for just a few special case names. tildetildetildesquiggle
-Also, "popular" opinion can be completely wrong - for example, the most common spelling I've seen for RBOZ-001 is not Bigasauru ''or'' Giant ZRK, it's "Bigasaur", which is not used in any official media.  And even with official sources, I'm not entirely convinced about Legacy having higher priority than English spellings in Japanese sources. [[User:Cheironyx|Cheironyx]] 23:07, April 7, 2011 (UTC)

Zoids Wiki

Talk: Rules